Homework 9: Balance

1. Fairness: According to Schell (2015), a game is asymmetrical if opponents have different resources or abilities; additionally, it is asymmetrical if there are more opponents chasing the main character (example: Pac-man and multiple ghosts) rather than a 1:1 ration (p. 203).  For these two reasons, Fly Fairy Fly is an asymmetrical game because our Fairy has more powers than the opponents do in the game, but there are multiple opponents and obstacles that will be introduced to slow the fairy down. This creates an interesting situation for the player of the game, yet still maintains a bit of fairness because the increased powers of the Fairy are balanced with obstacles.

2. Challenge vs. Success: One of the biggest challenges in game design is balancing the challenges and successes for the player (Schell, 2015, p. 209). There needs to be enough of a challenge to keep skilled players interested, but also enough easy successes to keep novice players interested. Additionally, Schell (2015) states that games should increasingly get difficult, but allow for passage of levels on varying grade levels (A,B,C).  Our group has designed various levels to the game that will increase in difficulty as the game progresses to keep the interest of all skill levels.  Additionally, players will have the opportunity to increase health, power, and time in each level.

3. Meaningful Choices: Meaningful choices are provided in Fly Fairy Fly through various design elements. We have avoided the dominant strategy of having one choice that is clearly better than the other is and followed a relationship of triangularity. Schell (2015) details that this is a relationship of ‘balanced asymmetric risk’ where there is a low risk/low reward option balanced with a high risk/high reward option (p. 211). In Fly Fairy Fly there are options for the player to advance the fairy rapidly through the level without collecting coins or bonus features but completing the level alive or the player can advance more slowly and collect all the coins, bonus features, and gain more points but the risk of death in the level increases.

4. Skill vs. Chance: Fly Fairy Fly will use more skill than chance. The majority of the game will be skill and work on players improving their skill to complete the levels faster or with more points over time. However, according to designer David Perry, “…any time players are taking risks, they are up against chance, in some way” (as cited in Schell, 2015, p. 214).  In our game, there is the opportunity for chance because the players can take the risk of going slow through a level and collecting more bonus features or take less risk and speed through the game as mentioned in the previous paragraph. This will provide the element of chance in our game slightly balancing the skill requirement.

5. Head vs. Hands: It would be ideal if the game had an equal balance of brain effort and physical activity in the game. There is some balance between the physical activity of moving through the level and the brain effort of strategizing or devising a plan to successfully complete the level. When reviewing the questions posed in Lens #42 by Schell (2015), one question posed was, “Would adding more places that involve puzzle solving in my game make it more interesting” (p. 216)?  When I was considering this question, I think that there are an appropriate amount of challenges in the game that will make it stimulating without being overly challenging or intense. I think the game provides an appropriate balance of “head vs. hands” to keep the player engaged and stimulated.

6. Competition vs. Cooperation: Currently, our game is a single-player game so there is really no sense of competition or cooperation with other players. Competition can be introduced by competing against one’s own record, maybe tracking the high score to create a competition as to who can beat the high score. Additionally, friends might be able to compete against each other to see who can beat the level or game the fastest or with the highest amount of points. There is no element of cooperation in Fly Fairy Fly.

7. Short vs. Long: Fly Fairy Fly is designed to be a relatively short game. First, it needs to be developed within a short amount of time so introducing extensive game playing options is not feasible. Additionally, the game runs the risk of becoming boring if it carries on for too long. There are only so many bonus points the fairy can collect or obstacle the fairy can beat before it becomes boring. Therefore, the gameplay is appropriately balanced with timing to limit how long a player spends on each level. The player can rush through to move on or slowly advance to gain more points. There are also additional time bonus features that a fairy can collect if they need more time on a level, this will help novice players be able to complete levels that are more difficult because they can add to their allotted time.

8. Rewards: Schell (2015) outlines multiple types of rewards available to offer players during a game (p. 220). Fly Fairy Fly utilizes praise, points, prolonged play, and possibly spectacle. Our game will offer praise when completing a level, probably with a “Great!” or “Good job!” popping up on screen after a player successfully completes a level. The game tracks points and the player can earn additional points by finishing in a certain time or collecting coins. There are also bonus features in the game that give the fairy more “life” or “health” which can serve as a reward.

9. Punishment: Punishment increases challenge and in our game, the punishment used is “shortened play” and “terminated play” (Schell, 2015, p. 223). The fairy has the possibility to lose health or lose a life throughout the game. If the player loses all their lives or health, the game is over and the player must restart.

10. Freedom vs. Controlled Experience: The freedom of the player is limited in Fly Fairy Fly and the player is offered more of a controlled experience. The player has small freedom to choose how to approach the game (i.e. fast or slower, earning points) but the actions take place in a controlled environment.

11. Simple vs. Complex: While our game design is simple, it is not “so simple it is boring” (Schell, 2015, p. 226). The game avoids “innate complexity” but offers more of an “emergent complexity” in which the game has a very simple ruleset that allows for numerous complex game situations (p. 227). If the player chooses to collect coins, then the player will be faced with obstacles to battle. The player might choose to rush through the game and will be challenged with obstacles or time. The rules/design is simple to avoid too many complex rules that the player is annoyed with trying to understand them all. However, the game play is designed to offer a variety of challenges that create varying complexity of game play.

12. Detail vs. Imagination: As an introduction to gaming class, our game reflects our desire to learn and provide a very detailed game, but with time constraints and ability constraints, our game does not have extremely advanced details. We have tried to provide detailed fairies to make the game interesting, as well as some of our bonus features are detailed and the surrounding area. The game will require the player to fill in some of the details and use their imagination.

Source: Schell, J. (2015). The art of game design: A book of lenses. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.